F 

O 
00 

m 

< 
•I 


BANCROFT 
LIBRARY 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 


No.    3187 


Itttlri  ^tat^fl 


OKrnttt  fflnttrt  nf  AppmlB 


Jfar  tl|p  Nitttlj  ffltmttt. 


AUGUST^SANDBERG, 


Plaintiff  in  Error, 


vs. 


UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA, 

Defendant  in  Error. 


WxmBttxpt  nf  SwnrJn* 


Upon  Writ  of  Error  to  the  United  States  District  Court  of  the 

District  of  Arizona. 


Filmer  Bros.  Co.  Print,  330  Jackson  St.,  S.  F.,  C-al. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/augustsandbergplOOsandrich 


No.    3187 


Oltrtmt  (Slttmt  of  Appeals 

Jfor  %  Kmtif  dirntit 


AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Plaintiff  in  Error, 
vs. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA, 

Defendant  in  Error. 


5Fratt0rrlpt  nf  Sworft, 


Upon  Writ  of  Error  to  the  United  States  District  Court  of  the 

District  of  Arizona. 


Filmer  Bros.  Co.  Print,  330  Jackson  St.,  S.  F.,  Cal. 


WZS3 


INDEX  TO  THE  PRINTED  TRANSCEIPT  OP 

EECORD. 


[Clerk's  Note:  When  deemed  likely  to  be  of  an  important  nature, 
errors  or  doubtful  matters  appearing  in  the  original  certified  record  axe 
printed  literally  in  italic;  and,  likewise,  cancelled  matter  appearing  in 
the  original  certified  record  is  printed  and  cancelled  herein  accord- 
ingly. When  possible,  an  omission  from  the  text  is  indicated  by 
printing  in  italic  the  two  words  between  which  the  omission  seems  to 
occur.] 

Page 
Acknowledgment  of  Service  of  Draft  of  Pro- 
posed Bill  of  Exceptions 41 

Assignment  of  Errors 44 

Bail  Bond 47 

Bill  of  Exceptions 17 

Certificate  of  Clerk  U.  S.  District  Court  to  Tran- 
script of  Record 52 

Citation  on  Writ  of  Error 55 

Demurrer  to  Indictment 8 

Indictment 2 

Judgment 14 

Minute  Entry  Made  and  Entered  on  May  18, 

1918 1 

Minutes  of  Court— May  18, 1918— Order  Setting 
Cause  for  Trial  and  Fixing  Amount  of  Bail 

Bond ^ 

Minutes  of  Court— May  22,  1918— Order  Sus- 
taining Demurrer  to  Fourth  Count  of  In- 
dictment and  Overruling  Demurrer  as    to 

All  Other  Counts,  etc 9 

Minutes  of  Court— May  28,  1918— Plea 10 

Minutes  of  Court— May  28,  1918— Trial 10 


ii  August  Sandherg  vs. 

Index.  Page 

Minutes  of  Court— May  29,  1918— Trial 12 

Minutes  of  Court — June  1, 1918 — Order  Enlarg- 
ing Time  to  File  Bill  of  Exceptions,  etc 15 

Minutes  of  Court— June  11,   1918 — ^Order  Re 

Confinement  of  August  Sandberg 16 

Minutes  of  Court— June  27,  1918— Order  En- 
larging Time  to  Prepare  Bill  of  Exceptions, 

etc 16 

Names  and  Addresses  of  Counsel 1 

Order  Allowing  Writ  of  Error 46 

Petition  for  Writ  of  Error 42 

Praecipe  for  Transcript  of  Record 50 

TESTIMONY  ON  BEHALF  OF  THE  GOV- 
ERNMENT: 

BLOCKENSDERFER,  F.  C 26 

BROUGHTON,  E.  H 22 

CAMERON,  ROBERT  E 25 

In  Rebuttal 39 

CRAMER,  WILLIAM 19 

In  Rebuttal 40 

DASPIT,  JESSE  C— In  Rebuttal 37 

GRAHAM,  EDWARD  M 21 

In  Rebuttal 40 

MURRAY,  JOHN  W.— In  Rebuttal 40 

TESTIMONY  ON  BEHALF  OF  DEFEND- 
ANT: 

BUTCHART,  W.  A 37 

DOUGLAS,  G.  M 36 

DOWELL,  GRANT  H 35 

KING,  WILLIAM  B 36 

KNOWLES,  J.  B 36 


United  States  of  America.  iii 

Index.  Page 

TESTIMONY   ON   BEHALF   OF   DEFEND- 
ANT— Continued : 

LA  GEANDE,  C.  E 35 

EOAEK,  C.  E 36 

SANDBEEG,  AUGUST 29 

Verdict 13 

Writ  of  Error 53 


Names  and  Addresses  of  Counsel. 
Hon.  THOMAS  A.  FLYNN,  United  States  Attor- 
ney, Phoenix,  Arizona, 
Hon.  CLIFFORD  R.  McFALL,  Assistant  United 

States  Attorney,  Tucson,  Arizona, 
Hon.  JOHN  H.  MARTIN,  Assistant  United  States 
Attorney,  Tucson  Arizona, 

Counsel  for  United  States  of  America. 
A.  A.  WORSLEY,  Esq.,  Tucson,  Arizona, 

Counsel  for  Defendant,  August  Sandberg. 

[1*1 


In  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  District 

of  Arizona, 

Minute  Entry  Made  and  Entered  on  May  18,  1918. 

Docket  No.  C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Comes  now  the  Grand  Jury  aforesaid,  and  through 
their  foreman  report  that  they  have  found  a  true 
bill  of  indictment  against  the  defendant  herein, 
charging  him  with  violation  of  Section  3  of  the 
Espionage  Act.     [3] 

*Page-number  appearing  at  foot  of  page  of  original  certified  Transcript 
of  Eecord. 


2  August  Sandberg  vs, 

0-704— TUCSON. 

Vio.  Title  I,  Sec.  3,  Act  of  June  15,  1917,  Making 
False  Statements  With  Intent  to  Interfere 
With  Military  and  Naval  Forces,  etc. 

United  States  of  America, 
District  of  Arizona, — ss. 

Indictment. 

In  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  in  and  for 
the  District  of  Arizona, 

At  the  May  Term  Thereof,  A.  D.  1918. 

The  Grand  Jurors  of  the  United  States,  im- 
paneled, sworn  and  charged  at  the  term  aforesaid, 
of  the  Court  aforesaid,  on  their  oath  present,  that 
August  Sandberg,  on  the  15th  day  of  December,  A.  D. 
1917,  and  within  the  said  District  of  Arizona,  the 
United  States  being  then,  and  at  all  times  herein 
mentioned,  at  war  with  the  Imperial  German  Gov- 
ernment, did,  with  the  intent,  on  the  part  of  him,  the 
said  August  Sandberg,  to  interfere  with  the  opera- 
tion and  success  of  the  military  and  naval  forces  of 
the  United  States,  willfully,  unlawfully  and  feloni- 
ously make  and  convey  certain  false  statements,  in 
this,  to  wit,  that  he,  the  said  August  Sandberg,  then 
and  there,  and  in  the  presence  of,  and  to  Robert  E. 
Cameron,  and  other  persons  to  the  Grand  Jurors  un- 
known, did  state  in  substance,  the  following : 

That  our  entry  into  the  war  was  brought  about 

by  the  Wall  Street  interests  in  order  to  protect 

our  foreign  loans  to  the  Allies ; 
which  said  statements  were  false,  as  he,  the  said  Au- 


United  States  of  America.  3 

gust  Sandberg,  then  and  there  well  knew,  contrary 
to  the  form  of  the  statute  in  such  case  made  and  pro- 
vided, and  against  the  peace  and  dignity  of  the 
United  States  of  America. 

SECOND  COUNT. 
And  the  Grand  Jurors  aforesaid,  on  their  oath 
aforesaid,  do  further  present,  that  August  Sandberg, 
on  the  22d  day  of  July,  A.  D.  1917,  and  within  the 
said  District  of  Arizona,  the  United  States  being  V 
then,  and  at  all  times  herein  mentioned,  at  war  with  \ 
the  Imperial  German  Government,  did  wilfully,  un-    I 
lawfully  and  feloniously  cause  and  attempt  to  cause    1 
insubordination,  disloyalty,  mutiny  and  refusal  of     \ 
duty  in  the  military  and  naval  forces  of  the  United      i 
States,  to  the  injury  of  the  said  service  and  of  the      1 
United  States,  in  this,  to  wit,  that  he,  the  said  August       ^ 
Sandberg,  did  then  and  there,  and  in  the  presence  of, 
and  to  E.  M.  Graham,  and  other  persons  to  the  Grand 
Jurors  unknown,  state  in  substance,  the  following: 
That  the  German  government  was  much  more 
democratic  than  ours;  that  the  German  people 
enjoyed  greater  liberties  than  the  Americans; 
that  it  will  be  a  great  blow  to  civilization  if  Ger- 
many should  lose ; 
contrary  to  the  form  of  the  statute  in  such  case  made 
and  provided,  and  against  the  peace  and  dignity  of 
the  United  States  of  America. 

THIRD  COUNT. 

And  the  Grand  Jurors  aforesaid,  on  their  oath 

aforesaid,  to  further  present,  that  August  Sandberg, 

on  the  22d  day  of  July,  A.  D.  1917,  and  within  the 

said  District  of  Arizona,  the  United  States  being 


4  August  Sandberg  vs, 

then,  and  at  all  times  herein  mentioned,  at  war  [4] 
with  the  Imperial  German  Government,  did  wilfully, 
unlawfully  and  feloniously  cause  and  attempt  to 
cause  insubordination,  disloyalty,  mutiny  and  re- 
fusal of  duty  in  the  military  and  naval  forces  of  the 
United  States,  to  the  injury  of  the  said  service  and 
of  the  United  States,  in  this,  to  wit,  that  he,  the  said 
August  Sandberg,  did  then  and  there,  and  in  the 
presence  of,  and  to  Eugene  H.  Broughton,  and  other 
persons  to  the  Grand  Jurors  unknown,  state  in  sub- 
stance, the  following: 

That  the  Germans  had  a  better  form  of  gov- 
ernment than  the  people  of  America ;  that  Presi- 
dent Wilson  was  a  weak  character  to  allow  Eng- 
land to  dictate  its  policy  and  then  the  President 
coming  out  and  making  speeches  to  back  up  the 
British  policies; 
contrary  to  the  form  of  the  statute  in  such  case  made 
and  provided  and  against  the  peace  and  dignity  of 
the  United  States  of  America. 

FOURTH  COUNT. 
And  the  Grand  Jurors  aforesaid,  on  their  oath 
aforesaid,  do  further  present,  that  August  Sandberg, 
on  the  15th  day  of  September,  A.  D.  1917,  and  within 
the  said  District  of  Arizona,  the  United  States  being 
then,  and  at  all  times  herein  mentioned,  at  war  with 
the  Imperial  German  Government,  did  wilfully,  un- 
lawfully and  feloniously  cause  and  attempt  to  cause 
insubordination,  disloyalty,  mutiny  and  refusal  of 
duty  in  the  military  and  naval  forces  of  the  United 
States,  to  the  injury  of  the  said  service  and  of  the 
United  States,  in  this,  to  wit,  that  he,  the  said  Au- 


United  States  of  America.  5 

gust  Sandberg,  did  then  and  there,  and  in  the  pres- 
ence of,  and  to  John  B.  Murray,  and  other  persons 
to  the  Grand  Jurors  unknown,  state  in  substance, 
the  following : 

The  German  Government  is  the  most  demo- 
cratic government  in  the  world; 
contrary  to  the  form  of  the  statute  in  such  case  made 
and  provided,  and  against  the  peace  and  dignity  of 
the  United  States  of  America. 

FIFTH  COUNT. 
And  the  Grand  Jurors  aforesaid,  on  their  oath 
aforesaid,  do  further  present,  that  August  Sandberg, 
on  the  15th  day  of  December,  A.  D.  1917,  and  within 
the  said  District  of  Arizona,  the  United  States  be- 
ing then,  and  at  all  times  herein  mentioned,  at  war 
with  the  Imperial  German  Government,  did  wilfully, 
unlawfully  and  feloniously  cause  and  attempt  to 
cause  insubordination,  disloyalty,  mutiny  and  re- 
fusal oi  duty  in  the  military  and  naval  forces  of  the 
United  States,  to  the  injury  of  the  said  service  and 
of  the  United  States,  in  this,  to  wit,  that  he,  the  said 
August  Sandberg,  did  then  and  there,  and  in  the 
presence  of,  and  to  Robert  E.  Cameron,  and  other 
persons  to  the  Grand  Jurors  unknown,  state  in  sub- 
stance, the  following: 

That  the  invasion  of  Belgium  by  Germany 
was  justified;  also  that  the  submarine  warfare 
carried  on  by  Germany  was  right  and  legitimate, 
and  that  the  sinking  of  the  ^^Lusitania"  was  jus- 
tified on  account  of  its  carrying  arms,  ammuni- 
tion and  supplies ; 
contrary  to  the  form  of  the  statute  in  such  case  made 


6  August  Sandberg  vs. 

and  provided,  and  against  the  peace  and  dignity  of 
the  United  States  of  America.  [5] 
SIXTH  COUNT. 
And  the  Grand  Jurors  aforesaid,  on  their  oath 
aforesaid,  do  further  present,  that  August  Sand- 
berg, on  the  22d  day  of  February,  A.  D.  1918,  and 
within  the  said  District  of  Arizona,  the  United  States 
being  then,  and  at  all  times  herein  mentioned,  at  war 
with  the  Imperial  German  Government,  did  wilfully, 
unlawfully  and  feloniously  cause  and  attempt  to 
cause  insubordination,  disloyalty,  mutiny  and  re- 
fusal of  duty  in  the  military  and  naval  forces  of  the 
United  States,  to  the  injury  of  the  said  service  and 
of  the  United  States,  in  this,  to  wit,  that  he,  the  said 
August  Sandberg,  did  then  and  there,  and  in  the 
presence  of  William  B.  Cramer,  and  other  persons 
to  the  Grand  Jurors  unknown,  state  in  substance,  the 
following ; 

Germany  is  not  as  much  of  an  autocracy  as 
the  United  States  because  the  United  States  does 
not  permit  criticism;  there  is  not  as  much  dan- 
ger of  revolution  in  Germany  as  in  the  allied 
countries,  including  the  United  States; 
contrary  to  the  form  of  the  statute  in  such  case  made 
and  provided,  and  against  the  peace  and  dignity  of 
the  United  States  of  America. 

THOMAS  A.  FLYNN, 
United  States  Attorney  for  the  District  of  Arizona. 

[Endorsements]  :  C-704 — Tucson.  In  the  United 
States  District  Court  for  the  District  of  Arizona. 
United  States  of  America  vs.  August  Sandberg. 
Indictment.     A  True  Bill.     R.  K.  Shelton,  Foreman 


United  States  of  America,  7 

of  the  Grand  Jury.  Witnesses  examined  before  the 
Grand  Jury:  Justin  C.  Daspit,  William  B.  Cramer, 
Robert  E.  Cameron,  F.  C.  Blickensderfer,  John  B. 
Murray,  Eugene  H.  Broughton,  E.  M.  Graham. 
Presented  to  the  Court  in  the  presence  of  the  Grand 
Jury  by  their  foreman,  and  filed  this  18th  day  of 
May,  A.  D.  1918.     Mose  Drachman,  Clerk.     [6] 


In  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  District 

of  Arizona, 

Docket  No.  C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Minutes  of  Court^May  18,  1918.— Order  Setting 
Cause  for  Trial,  and  Fixing  Amount  of  Bail 
Bond. 

It  is  ordered  that  this  case  be,  and  the  same  is 
hereby,  set  for  trial  for  May  25,  1918,  and  the  bond 
of  the  defendant  fixed  in  the  sum  of  Ten  Thousand 
Dollars  ($10,000). 


Docket  No.  C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMEKICA 

vs. 
AUGUST  SANDBEEG, 


Defendant. 


8  August  Sandberg  vs. 

Demurrer  to  Indictment. 

Comes  now  August  Sandberg,  the  defendant  in 
the  above-entitled  and  numbered  cause,  by  his  attor- 
ney, and  demurs  to  the  indictment  herein  and  to  each 
and  every  count  of  said  indictment  upon  the  grounds 
and  for  the  following  reasons,  to  wit  : 

1.  That  it  appears  from  the  face  of  said  indict- 
ment that  the  same,  and  each  and  every  count  thereof, 
does  not  state  facts  sufficient  to  constitute  an  offense, 
or  any  offense,  against  the  laws  or  any  law  of  the 
United  States  of  America. 

2.  That  it  appears  from  the  face  of  said  indict- 
ment, and  from  each  and  every  count  thereof,  that 
the  said  indictment,  and  each  and  every  count  of 
same,  does  not  state  facts  sufficient  to  constitute  an 
offense  or  any  offense  against  that  said  act  of,  or 
law  enacted  by,  the  Congress  of  the  United  States 
of  America  [7]  entitled  ^^The  Espionage  Act," 
and  of  date  June  15,  1917,  or  against  the  provisions 
of  the  said  law  or  any  part  thereof. 

WHEREFORE,  defendant  prays  judgment  of  the 
Court  that  the  said  indictment,  and  each  and  every 
count  thereof,  be  quashed  and  dismissed  and  that  the 
defendant  be  discharged. 

T.  P.  HARTE, 
Attorney  for  Defendant. 

[Endorsements] :  In  the  United  States  District 
Court  in  and  for  the  District  of  Arizona.  Docket 
No.  C-704 — Tucson.  United  States  of  America  vs. 
August   Sandberg,   Defendants.     Demurrer.     Piled 


United  States  of  America.  9 

May  21,  1918.     Mose  Drachman,  Clerk.    By  Effie 
D.  Botts,  Deputy  Clerk. 


Docket  No.  C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Minutes  of  Court— May  22, 19ia— Order  Sustaining 
Demurrer  to  Fourth  Count  of  Indictment  and 
Overruling  Demurrer  as  to  All  Other  Counts, 
etc. 

This  case  came  on  for  hearing  this  day  upon  the 
demurrer  of  the  defendant  to  the  indictment  herein, 
Thomas  A.  Flynn,  United  States  Attorney,  appear- 
ing on  behalf  of  the  United  States,  and  T.  P.  Harte, 
Esquire,  appearing  on  behalf  of  the  defendant,  said 
demurrer  was  argued  and  submitted  to  the  Court, 
and  thereupon  it  is  ordered  by  the  Court  that  said 
demurrer  be,  and  the  same  is  hereby,  sustained  as  to 
the  fourth  count  of  the  indictment,  and  that  the  said 
demurrer  be,  and  the  same  is  hereby,  overruled  as  to 
all  others,  to  which  ruling  of  the  Court  in  overruling 
part  of  said  demurrer,  defendant  excepts. 


10  August  Sandberg  vs. 

Docket  No.  C-7(M— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Minutes  of  Court— May  28,  1918— Plea. 

The  United  States  Attorney  being  present,  comes 
now  the  defendant  herein  in  person  and  by  counsel, 
A.  A.  Worsley,  Esquire  [8]  and  upon  being 
arraigned  at  the  bar  of  this  Court  upon  the  Indict- 
ment herein,  said  indictment  being  read  to  him,  a 
copy  whereof  with  the  endorsements  thereon  is 
handed  to  the  said  defendant,  who  states  that  his 
true  name  is  as  set  out  in  said  indictment.  And  now 
upon  being  called  upon  to  enter  a  plea  herein,  said 
defendant  pleads  that  he  is  Not  Guilty,  whereupon 
said  plea  is  ordered  entered. 


Docket  No.  C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 
vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Minutes  of  Court— May  28,  1918— Trial. 

This  case  came  on  this  day  regularly  for  trial,  C.  R. 
McFall  and  John  H.  Martin,  Assistant  United  States 
Attorneys,  appearing  on  behalf  of  the  prosecution, 
comes  now  the  defendant  herein  in  person  and  with 


United  States  of  America,  11 

counsel,  A.  A.  Worsley,  Esquire,  into  open  court, 
and  both  parties  announce  ready  for  trial.  Twenty- 
eight  jurors  were  called  and  sworn  and  examined  as 
to  their  qualifications  and  all  found  to  be  qualified. 
Both  parties  exercised  their  right  of  respective  chal- 
lenge and  the  following  twelve  jurors  were  called 
according  to  law  and  duly  sworn  to  well  and  truly 
try  the  issues  joined  herein:  J.  A.  Hanovan,  W.  F. 
Murdock,  R.  P.  Flynn,  Roderick  McNeil,  Richard  M. 
Johnson,  Paul  Gatlin,  Paul  Jones,  James  E.  Tom- 
blinson,  S.  G.  Bailey,  J.  F.  McKale,  Charles  H. 
Pogue  and  W.  B.  Dolan.  The  prosecution  then  read 
aloud  the  indictment  herein  and  stated  the  plea  of 
the  defendant  thereto,  to  wit:  Not  Guilty,  which  is 
the  issue  to  be  tried  herein.  Lena  Burgess  was 
sworn  as  court  reporter  in  this  case.  The  prosecu- 
tion then  to  maintain  upon  its  part  the  issues  herein, 
called  as  witnesses :  William  B.  Cramer,  Edward  M. 
Graham,  John  B.  Murray,  Eugene  Broughton,  R.  B. 
Cameron  and  Frank  C.  Blickensderfer,  who  were 
duly  sworn,  e^tamined  and  cross-examined,  [9] 
and  thereupon  the  prosecution  rested  its  case.  The 
defendant  then  to  maintain  upon  his  part  the  issues 
herein,  moved  the  Court  for  a  directed  verdict,  which 
motion  was  denied  by  the  Court,  to  which  ruling  of 
the  Court  defendant  excepts.  The  defendant  then 
took  the  stand  in  his  own  behalf  and  was  duly  sworn, 
examined  and  cross-examined,  and  called  as  wit- 
nesses G.  H.  Dowell,  C.  Le  Grande,  J.  B.  Knowles, 
B.  King,  G.  M.  Douglas  and  W.  B  Butchard,  who 
were  duly  sworn  and  examined;  and  thereupon  the 
defendant  rested  his  case.     The  prosecution  then 


12  August  Sandherg  vs. 

called  in  rebuttal,  Justin  C.  Daspit,  who  was  sworn 
and  examined;  and  R.  B.  Cameron,  John  W.  Mur- 
ray, Edward  M.  Graham  and  Wm.  B.  Cramer,  who 
were  further  examined,  and  thereupon  the  prosecu- 
tion rested  its  case.  There  being  no  further  testi- 
mony offered  and  the  evidence  being  closed  and  com- 
pleted, argument  of  respective  counsel  was  had  in 
part.  The  hour  for  adjournment  having  arrived  and 
the  trial  of  this  case  not  being  completed,  the  Court 
duly  admonished  the  jury  and  excused  them  from 
further  attendance  upon  this  Court  until  Wednes- 
day, the  29th  day  of  May,  A.  D.  1918,  at  9:30  o'clock 
A.  M.,  to  which  time  the  further  trial  of  this  case  is 
now  ordered  continued. 


Docket  No.  C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OE  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Minutes  of  Court— May  29, 1918— Trial. 

The  trial  of  this  case  having  been  continued  from 
a  previous  session  of  this  court,  comes  now  all  the 
parties  hereto,  comes  also  the  jurors  herein,  their 
names  are  called  and  all  answering  thereto  respec- 
tively, the  argument  was  completed,  and  the  Court 
duly  instructs  the  jury  orally,  and  said  jury  retire 
in  charge  of  their  bailiff,  J.  E.  Hogan,  first  duly 
sworn,  to  consider  their  verdict.  Subsequently  said 
jury  return  into    [10]    court,  their  names  are  called 


United  States  of  America.  13 

and  all  answering  thereto  respectively,  upon  being 
asked  if  they  have  agreed  upon  a  verdict,  report  that 
they  have  agreed  and  thereupon  present  the  follow- 
ing verdict: 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Verdict. 

We,  the  jury,  duly  empaneled  and  sworn  in  the 
above-entitled  action,  upon  our  oaths,  do  find  the  de- 
fendant Guilty  in  the  manner  and  form  as  charged  in 
counts  one,  two,  three,  five  and  six  of  the  indictment. 

S.  G.  BAILE, 
Foreman. 

Whereupon,  it  is  adjudged  by  the  Court  that  the 
defendant  is  so  guilty  of  the  crime  charged,  and  it  is 
ordered  that  he  be  remanded  to  the  custody  of  the 
United  States  Marshal  to  await  the  passing  of  sen- 
tence herein.  It  is  further  ordered  that  the  jury  be 
discharged  from  this  case. 


JUDGMENT  MADE  AND  ENTERED  ON  JUNE 

1st,  1918. 

Docket  No.  C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 
vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 


14  August  Sandberg  vs. 

Judgment. 

The  defendant  being  present  in  open  court  in  per- 
son, and  by  Ms  counsel,  A.  A.  Worsley,  Esq.,  The 
United  States  Attorney  for  Arizona  present  on  the 
part  of  the  United  States.  And  this  being  the  time 
heretofore  fixed  for  passing  judgment  on  the  defend- 
ant in  this  case,  the  defendant,  August  Sandberg, 
was  duly  informed  by  the  Court  of  the  nature  of  the 
indictment  found  against  him  for  the  crime  of  viola- 
tion Title  1,  Section  3,  Act  of  June  15,  1917,  making 
false  statements  with  intent  to  interfere  with  mil- 
itary and  naval  forces,  etc.,  committed  on  the  15th 
day  of  December,  A.  D.  1917,  of  which  crime  defend- 
ant was  found  [11]  guilty  by  a  jury  on  the  29th 
day  of  May,  A.  D.  1918. 

The  defendant  was  then  asked  if  he  had  any  legal 
cause  to  show  why  judgment  should  not  be  pro- 
nounced against  him ;  and  no  sufficient  cause  being 
shown  or  appearing  to  the  Court,  thereupon  the 
Court  renders  its  judgment:  That,  whereas  you,  Au- 
gust Sandberg,  having  been  duly  convicted  in  this 
court  of  the  crime  aforesaid,  it  is  found  by  the  Court 
that  you  are  so  guilty  of  said  crime. 

IT  IS  THEREFORE  ORDERED,  ADJUDGED 
AND  DECREED,  and  the  judgment  and  sentence 
of  the  Court  is,  that  you,  August  Sandberg,  be  pun- 
ished by  imprisonment  in  the  United  States  Peni- 
itentiary  at  Leavenworth,  Kansas,  for  a  term  of  two 
years  to  date  from  June  1st,  1918,  and  that  you  pay 
a  fine  of  Five  Hundred  Dollars  ($500.00)  and  in  de- 
fault of  the  payment  of  said  fine  that  you  stand 
committed. 


United  States  of  America.  15 

The  defendant  was  then  remanded  to  the  custody 
of  the  United  States  Marshal  for  said  District,  to 
be  by  him  delivered  into  the  custody  of  the  proper 
officer  of  said  United  States  Penitentiary  at  Leav- 
enworth, Kansas. 

AND  IT  IS  FURTHER  ORDERED,  that  a  cer- 
tified copy  of  this  judgment  shall  be  sufficient  war- 
rant for  the  said  marshal  to  take,  keep  and  safely 
deliver  the  said  August  Sandberg  into  the  custody 
of  the  proper  officers  of  said  United  States  Peniten- 
tiary at  Leavenworth,  Kansas,  and  a  sufficient 
warrant  for  the  officers  of  said  United  States  Peni- 
tentiary at  Leavenworth,  Kansas,  to  keep  and  im- 
prison the  said  August  Sandberg.     [12] 


Docket  No.  C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OE  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Minutes  of  Court--Juiie  1,  1918 — Order  Enlarging 
Time  to  File  Bill  of  Exceptions^  etc. 

It  is  ordered  that  the  defendant  herein  be  and  he 
is  hereby  granted  thirty  days  from  this  date  within 
which  to  file  bill  of  exceptions,  assignment  of  errors, 
petition  for  writ  of  error,  and  other  necessary 
papers  to  perfect  an  appeal  to  the  Circuit  Court  of 
Appeals  for  the  Ninth  Circuit. 


16  August  Sandherg  vs. 

Docket  No.  C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA, 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Minutes  of  Court— June  11,  1918— Order  Re 
Confinement  of  August  Sandberg. 

It  appearing  to  the  Court  tliat  the  defendant  in 
the  above-entitled  case  expects  to  perfect  an  appeal 
to  the  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Ninth  Circuit 
that  an  order  has  been  heretofore  entered  granting 
said  defendant  additional  time  to  prepare  and  file 
bill  of  exceptions  herein,  it  is  ORDERED  by  the 
Court  that  the  United  States  Marshal  for  the  Dis- 
trict of  Arizona  do  hold  and  confine  the  said  August 
Sandberg  in  the  custody  of  the  proper  officer  of  the 
county  jail  of  Pima  county,  State  of  Arizona,  until 
the  further  order  of  this  Court. 


Docket  No.  C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OP  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Minutes  of  Courl^-June  27,  1918— Order  Enlarging 
Time  to  Prepare  Bill  of  Exceptions,  etc. 

Por  good  cause  shown,  it  is  ordered  that  the  de- 
fendant    [13]     above  named,  he  and  he  is  hereby 


United  States  of  America,  17 

granted  an  additional  thirty  days  from  the  time  of 
the  expiration  of  the  order  heretofore  entered  grant- 
ing addition  time,  within  which  to  prepare  and  file 
his  bill  of  exceptions,  assignment  of  error,  petition 
for  writ  of  error  and  other  necessary  papers  to  per- 
fect an  appeal  to  the  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  for 
the  Ninth  Circuit. 


In  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  District 

of  Arizona, 

C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 
Bill  of  Exceptions. 
BE  IT  REMEMBERED  that  on  the  first  day  of 
June,  1918,  at  a  regular  and  stated  term  of  the 
United  States  District  Court  for  the  District  of  Ari- 
zona, the  same  being  one  of  the  regular  judicial  days 
of  the  May  Term  of  said  court,  of  1918,  begun  and 
held  in  the  city  of  Tucson,  county  of  Pima,  State  of 
Arizona,  be  and  before  his  Honor,  W.  H.  Sawtelle, 
District  Judge  of  said  District,  the  defendant,  Au- 
gust Sandberg,  appeared  in  person,  and  by  his 
counsel,  A.  A.  Worsley,  to  receive  judgment  and 
sentence  and  he  was  thereupon  adjudged  guilty  and 
sentence  to  serve  a  term  of  two  years  in  the  Federal 
Prison  at  Leavenworth,  Kansas,  and  to  pay  a  fine 
of  Five  Hundred  Dollars,  and  the  defendant  is  ag- 


18  August  Sandherg  vs, 

grieved  thereby  and  by  the  effect  of  such  judgment 
and  sentence,  and  desiring  to  have  the  same  reviewed 
by  the  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  of  the  Ninth  Cir- 
cuit, hereby  submits  to  his  Honor,  W.  H,  Sawtelle, 
the  following  as  his  bill  of  exceptions : 

To  sustain  the  defendant's  contention  that  the 
Court  erred  in  denying  defendant's  motion  for  an 
instructed  verdict  of  acquittal,  defendant  says  that 
at  the  close  of  the  testimony  [14]  on  the  part  of 
the  Government  the  defendant  moved  the  Court  to 
instruct  the  jury  as  follows:  That  it  does  not  appear 
from  the  evidence  in  the  case  that  there  was  any  in- 
tent, either  express  or  implied,  and  that  the  evidence 
does  not  tend  to  show  any  false  statements  made  or 
circulated  for  the  purpose  of  hindering,  delaying, 
corrupting  or  in  anywise  interfering  with  the  United 
States  Government,  or  its  army  or  forces  in  this 
war. 

On  the  further  ground  that  the  evidence  does  not 
bring  the  offense  within  the  Act  designated  as  the 
Espionage  Act,  and  that  such  offense,  if  any  offense, 
had  been  shown  or  stated,  does  not  come  within  the 
purview  of  the  law. 

On  the  further  ground  that  to  construe  the  evi- 
dence in  this  case,  as  bringing  the  case  within  that 
act,  would  be  a  violation  of  the  provisions  of  the 
United  States  Constitution,  with  reference  to  the 
freedom  of  speech  and  the  freedom  of  the  press. 

On  the  further  ground  that  there  is  no  evidence 
tending  to  show  that  any  of  the  statements  claimed 
to  be  false  and  claimed  to  be  falsely  circulated  in 
the  indictment  are  false  or  true  or   whether   they 


United  States  of  America,  19 

were  known  to  be  false  or  known  to  be  untrue  at  the 
time,  and  the  Court  or  jury  without  any  testimony 
could  not  find,  and  would  not  be  justified  in  finding, 
that  the  statements  were  either  true  or  false,  with- 
out any  evidence  as  to  the  truth  or  falsity  of  the 
statements. 

On  the  further  ground  that  there  is  no  evidence 
tending  to  prove  any  overt  act  on  the  part  of 
the  defendant  from  which  criminality  could  be  im- 
plied. 

The  motion  was  by  the  Court  then  and  there  de- 
nied to  which  the  defendant  duly  excepted.  / 

Now,  therefore,  to  sustain  defendant's  said  mo- 
tion, defendant  here  gives  in  substance  all  the  mate- 
rial testimony  introduced  by  the  Government  wit- 
nesses, to  wit:     [15 J 

Testimony  of  William  Cramer,  for  the  Government. 

WILLIAM  CRAMER,  the  first  witness  for  the 
Government,  testified  as  follows: 

One  statement  Dr.  Sandberg  made  on  or  about 
February  13th,  1918,  I  remember  very  well  and  in 
particular  was  that  he  said  to  his  mind  the  entry  of 
the  United  States  into  the  war  was  brought  about 
by  Wall  Street  interests  for  the  purpose  of  protect- 
ing our  loans  to  the  Allies.  He  stated  that  Ger- 
many was  perfectly  justified  in  the  invasion  of  Bel- 
gium and  made  the  inference — 

Worsley  objected  to  the  inference. 

Objection  sustained  by  the  Court. 

And  stated  that  it  was  a  well-known  fact  that  if 
Germany  had  not  invaded  Belgium  that  France  or 


20  August  Sandherg  vs, 

(Testimony  of  William  Cramer.) 
England  had  planned  to  go  through  to  Germany  in 
that  way.  He  stated  that  the  sinking  of  the  ^^Lusi- 
tania"  was  justified,  inasmuch  as  it  carried  arms 
and  munitions,  and  when  I  remarked  to  him,  ^^Can 
you  possibly  say  that  that  you  think  the  sinking  of 
the  ^Lusitania'  w^as  justified 'Fihe  said  quite  heat- 
edly that  Germany  had  not  starred  this  submarine 
warfare  until  England  had  strewn  the  North  Sea 
with  mines  and  that  we  read  only  of  boats  and  peo- 
ple lost  as  the  result  of  German  submarines,  but 
heard  nothing  of  the  ships  that  went  down  asa  re- 
sult of  the  laying  of  mines  in  the  North  Sea. j  He 
stated  that  to  his  mind  the  ruthless  subntsHHhfl^cam- 
paign  of  Germany  was  all  right.  He  stated  that 
Germany  was  not  as  much  an  autocratic  country  as 
the  United  States.  That  there  was  a  whole  lot  more 
danger  of  revolution  in  the  Allied  countries,  in- 
cluding the  United  States,  than  in  Germany.  He 
stated  that  Germany  and  the  Kaiser  did  not  start  the 
war,  and  went  on  to  explain  that  the  Kaiser  did  not 
have  the  power  to  start  the  war,  as  he  had  to  be 
backed  by  the  Reichstag  and  the  Bundersrat,  and 
he  laid  the  blame  for  the  war  particularly  on  Eng- 
land. He  said  England  was  to  blame  for  the  war. 
He  said  Earl  Gray  was  to  blame  for  the  war.  He 
said  he  did  not  think  President  Wilson  was  doing 
right  appealing  to  the  German  people  to  overthrow 
the  Kaiser  and  stating,  as  the  President  did  at  that 
time,  that  he  would  not  consider  making  [16] 
peace  with  the  present  ruling  powers.  He  said  that 
President  Wilson  was  wrong   for   stating  that   in 


United  States  of  America,  21 

(Testimony  of  William  Cramer.) 

States  like  Alsace-Loraine  it  was  to  be  left  to  the 

people   with   what    large    powers  they  were  to  be 

allied. 

A  great  many  of  the  statements  that  Dr.  Sandberg 
made  on  that  day  were  much  the  same  as  made  ten 
days  before,  and  in  addition  the  doctor  delivered  a 
very  interesting  discourse  on  the  history  of  the  for- 
mation of  the  German  Empire,  and  he  traced  that 
from  the  time  of  inception,  up  to  the  present,  and 
enlightened  me  on  a  great  many  points  I  had  not 
known  as  to  the  powers  of  the  Reichstag  and  the 
Bundersrat,  and  the  form  of  their  government.  The 
witness  stated  that  no  one  else  was  present.  The 
witness  stated  that  it  did  not  cause  him  to  have  any 
disloyal  feelings  towards  his  country.  The  witness 
stated  that  he  was  thirty-seven  years  old  and  not  of 
draft  age.  The  witness  said  that  he  did  not  mention 
anything  about  the  matter  for  about  three  weeks 
afterwards.  Witness  said  he  did  not  know  abso- 
lutely whether  the  statements  made  by  the  defend- 
ant were  true  or  false. 

Testimony  of  Edward  M.  Graham,  for  the 
Government. 

EDWARD  M.  GRAHAM,  another  witness  on  be- 
half of  the  Government,  testified  in  substance  as  fol- 
lows : 

My  name  is  Edward  M.  Graham;  am  38  years  old; 
represent  W.  S.  Tyler  Company,  manufacturers  of 
mining  machinery.  I  have  known  August  Sandberg 
for  four,   about  four  years,  in  a  business  way.     He 


22  August  Sandherg  vs, 

(Testimony  of  Edward  M.  Graham.) 
talked  once  with  me  regarding  this   war,   July  22, 
1917,  at  the  Gadsden  Hotel,  in  Douglas,  Arizona, 
starting  the  conversation.     No  one  else  was  present. 

He,  Mr.  Sandberg,  said  that  Germany  had  a  more 
democratic  government  than  the  United  States. 
That  the  people  had  greater  liberties  in  Germany. 
He  gave  me  the  name  of  a  book  to  read  on  that  sub- 
ject. The  name  of  the  book  was  ^'Comparison  of 
Constitutional  Law,"  by  Prof.  Burges.  He  re- 
ferred me  to  another  book  concerning  [17]  Eng- 
land in  the  war  by  Thompson.  That  was  in  connec- 
tion with  England  being  to  blame  for  the  war. 

He  stated  that  it  would  be  a  great  blow  to  civiliza- 
tion if  Germany  should  lose  the  war ;  that  President 
Wilson  was  Pro-British  and  led  the  American  peo- 
ple into  the  war.  Witness  said  he  did  not  know 
whether  the  statements  made  with  reference  to  Gov- 
ernments, including  Germany  and  ours,  were  true  or 
false.  He  did  not  mention  it  to  anyone  for  a  long 
time  afterwards. 

Testimony  of  E.  H.  Broughton,  for  the  Grovemment. 

E.  H.  BROUGHTON,  a  witness  for  the  Govern- 
ment, testified  in  substance  as  follows : 

I  am  thirty  years  old.  I  know  Dr.  Sandberg  in  a 
business.  He  talked  with  me  about  the  war  in  the 
office  of  the  test-mill  at  Bisbee,  between  December 
5th,  and  December  lOth,  1917,  and  also  in  June  or 
July,  1917.  Dr.  Sandberg  said  to  me  that  in  a 
speech  that  the  President  had  made  he  said  that 
America  and  the  Allies  will  fight  Germany  and  her 


United  States  of  America,  23 

(Testimony  of  E.  H.  Broughton.) 
Allies  until  the  German  people  will  overthrow  the 
present  form  of  government  and  establish  demo- 
cratic form  and  will  not  make  peace  with  the  present 
rulers  of  Germany.  He  said  the  President  was 
wrong  in  saying  that,  because  the  German  people  did 
not  want  a  different  form  of  government.  That 
their  form  of  government  was  more  democratic  than 
the  Government  of  the  United  States.  That  Presi- 
dent Wilson  had  more  powers  that  the  Kaiser. 
That  President  Wilson  could  declare  war  and  the 
Kaiser  could  not.  He  said  the  President  had  a  weak 
character  in  allowing  the  British  to  dictate  his  poli- 
cies and  the  President  to  make  speeches  on  those  pol- 
icies so  the  people  would  back  the  President  up  in  his 
policies.  The  witness  said  there  was  an  article 
written  in  a  magazine,  the  ^^ Review  of  Reviews," 
November  17th,  by  Frank  Simonds,  entitled  *^  Eng- 
land's great  Fight,"  part  of  this  article  was 
about  the  gradual  wearing  away  of  the  male  mem- 
bers of  the  German  army,  or  the  killing  off  of  the 
male  Germans.  Mr.  Simonds  compared  the  present 
conflict  with  a  hare  and  hound  chase ;  hounds  are  em- 
ployed to  run  down  a  hare,  [18]  one  hound  would 
run  the  hare  until  he  was  tired,  and  then  the  second 
hound  would  take  up  the  chase,  and  so  on.  France 
was  compared  to  the  first  hound,  England  to  the 
second,  and  the  United  States  the  third.  United 
States  was  to  deliver  the  final  blow,  or  kill  the  males 
of  the  German  army.  He  said  it  was  the  most  brutal 
thing  he  ever  heard  of.  That  it  was  like  the 
American  savage  of  long  ago ;  that  if  that  was  the 


24  August  Sandberg  vs, 

(Testimony  of  E.  H.  Broughton.) 
opinion  of  the  American  people,  it  showed  a  very  un- 
civilized people.  He  said  the  President  had  a  weak 
character  in  allowing  the  British  to  indicate  his  poli- 
cies. He  said  that  if  the  American  people  were  of 
the  opinion  of  the  writer,  it  showed  a  very  uncivil- 
ized people.  This  conversation  was  called  out  by  a 
magazine  containing  the  article  lying  on  my  desk, 
and  Dr.  Sandberg  saw  it.  One  other  thing  I  can  re- 
member he  said  when  I  told  him  about  the  things  I 
had  been  through  in  training  camp,  as  a  reserve  offi- 
cer in  the  regular  army.  He  said  the  rate  of  deaths 
per  thousand  in  the  cantonments  in  the  middle  west 
was  very  high,  much  more  as  to  number,  as  he  re- 
membered, in  this  country,  than  they  were  in  his 
country,  when  they  were  mobilized. 

Worsely  moved  that  it  be  stricken  out  as  immate- 
rial. 

Overruled  by  the  Court,  and  exception. 

Witness  said  he  did  not  regard  any  of  the  state- 
ments as  an  attempt  to  influence  him  to  be  unpatri- 
otic, and  that  the  discussion  came  up,  and  that  there 
was  no  feeling  manifest  one  way  or  the  other.  He 
said  that  he  had  full  confidence  in  Dr.  Sandberg, 
in  every  way.  That  he  had  no  suspicion  whatever 
of  Dr.  Sandberg,  the  defendant,  was  an  enemy  of  the 
country,  and  that  his  conduct  and  what  he  said  did 
not  lead  him  to  believe  that  he  was  attempting  to 
hinder  the  operation  of  the  war.  He  did  not  men- 
tion it  to  anyone  for  quite  a  long  time  afterwards. 


United  States  of  America.  25 


Testimony  of  Robert  E.  Cameron,  for  the 
Government. 

EGBERT  E.  CAMERON,  a  \\itness  on  behalf  of 
the  Government,  testified  in  substance  as  follows: 
[19] 

I  am  thirty-six  years  of  age ;  am  the  testing  engi- 
neer for  Phelps-Dodge;  have  known  Dr.  Sandberg 
four  years;  we  talked  about  the  war  on  two  occa- 
sions, December  6th  and  26th,  1917,  on  the  way  from 
Douglas  to  Bisbee.  He  talked  almost  continuously 
about  the  war,  saying  that  the  United  States  was 
more  autocratic  than  Germany,  because  it  suppressed 
criticism.  He  said  the  American  people  thought 
the  income  tax  was  higher  in  Germany,  but  that  taxes 
were  getting  much  higher  in  the  United  States,  and  the 
people  would  not  stand  for  it.  He  talked  about  Dr. 
Dye,  formerly  assistant  general  manager  of  the 
Phelps-Dodge  corporation,  being  in  the  diplomatic 
service,  and  having  gone  to  Norway!  to  investigate  con- 
ditions in  Sweden,  and  that  he  might  see  Dr.  Dye  over 
there,  as  he  had  a  position  there,  if  he  could  get  out 
with  his  stuff.  He  explained  ''his  stuff"  as  meaning 
his  notes.  He  said  he  would  not  take  his  money  to 
Sweden,  as  American  money  is  only  worth  sixty  cents 
on  the  dollar.  He  said  the  submarine  warfare  was 
right  and  legitimate.  His  reasons  for  it  I  do  not 
remember.  He  said  the  sinking  of  the  ''Lusitania" 
was  right,  on  account  of  it  carrying  munitions  to  the 
allies.  The  witness  said  he  didn't  remember  whether 
these  statements   were  made  in  1915  or  1916.     He 


26  August  Scmdberg  vs. 

(Testimony  of  Eobert  E.  Cameron.) 
said  lie  did  not  mention  it  to  anyone  for  a  long  time 
afterwards.  He  said  the  American  Diplomatic  ser- 
vice was  about  as  useful  as  a  bunch  of  ten  year  old 
boys.  I  do  not  know  what  Dr.  Sandberg's  inten- 
tions were  in  talking  about  the  war  and  did  not  think 
about  it  at  that  time.  I  did  not  mention  the  con- 
versation to  anyone  except  one  party  until  the  secret 
service  asked  me  about  it,  three  months  after  the 
first  conversation,  and  two  months  after  the  second. 

Testimony  of  F.   C.   Blockensderfer,  for  the 
Government. 

F.  C.  BLOCKENSDERFER,  a  witness  for  the 
Government,  testified  in  substance  as  follows : 

I  have  known  Dr.  Sandberg  about  five  years.  I 
am  metallurgist  and  assistant  superintendent  of  the 
Burro  Mountain  Branch  of  the  Phelps-Dodge  cor- 
poration. In  the  month  of  April,  1917,  the  latter 
part,  shortly  after  the  entrance  of  the  United  States 
into  the  war.  Dr.  Sandberg  [20]  made  statements 
to  me  in  conversation,  as  follows:  The  defendant 
said  to  me  shortly  after  the  United  States  entered 
the  war  that  the  Allies,  composed  of  Britain,  France, 
Russia  and  Italy,  realized  that  they  could  not  win 
the  war  and  effectively  destroy  the  economic  and 
and  political  unity  of  the  Triple  Alliance,  composed 
of  Germany,  the  Dial  Empire  and  Turkey,  conse- 
quently, England  instructed  Lord  Northcliffe  to 
exert  his  influence  upon  our  weak  and  politically  in- 
clined President  Wilson  to  bring  the  United  States 
into  the  war.     That  President  Wilson  and  his  clique 


United  States  of  America.  27 

(Testimony  of  F.  C.  Blockensderfer.) 
of  conspiring  politicians  drew  this  country  into  war. 
The  mass  of  the  people  of  the  United  States  are  not 
in  sympathy  with  the  war.  Our  weak  President  and 
his  damnable  policy  toward  Germany  is  wholly  wrong 
and  not  the  best  interest  of  this  country.  No  one 
except  he  and  I  were  present.  ^, 

I  fix  the  time  of  the  conversation  because  I  wrote 
a  letter  to  a  friend  of  mine  who  was  a  Major  in  the 
United  States  Army,  asking  for  information  about 
my  enlistment.  I  told  the  defendant  I  had  written 
the  letter  and  I  was  making  an  attempt  to  get  into 
the  United  States  Army.  The  defendant  said  noth- 
ing about  that  to  me.  I  will  be  thirty-seven  years  old 
the  coming  23d  of  July. 

To  sustain  the  contention  of  the  defendant  that 
the  Court  erred  in  denying  the  defendant's  motion 
to  strike  from  the  record,  and  the  consideration  of 
the  jury,  the  testimony  of  F.  C.  Blickensderf  er  here- 
inbefore set  forth,  the  motion  and  the  action  of  the 
Court  thereon,  are  herein  set  forth. 

Motion  by  Mr.  Worsley,  made  at  the  opening  of 
court  on  the  morning  of  May  29th,  1918,  before  he 
resumed  his  argument  to  the  jury,  and  after  both 
sides  had  rested,  and  the  argument  to  the  jury  had 
been  partially  made :  I  now  ask  the  Court  to  strike 
from  the  testimony,  and  the  consideration  of  the 
jury,  I  mean  to  strike  from  the  record  the  testimony 
of  one  Blickensderfer,  the  witness  who  testified  as 
to  what  took  place  over  at  Tyrone,  on  the  grounds 
that  it  would  be  a  violation  of  the  provisions  of  the 
United  States  Constitution,  with  reference  to  ex  post 


28  August  Sandberg  vs, 

facto  laws  and  the  punishment  of  a  man  for  an  [21] 
act  committed  before  the  law  was  passed.  The  tes- 
timony is  that  it  occurred  that  last  week  of  April, 
and  the  law  was  not  passed  until  the  15th  day  of  June 
following  : 

The  COUET.— What  act  do  you  mean? 

Mr.  WORSLEY.— The  Espionage  law. 

The  COURT.— I  do  not  think  I  could  strike  it  out 
now.  I  could  charge  the  jury  in  reference  to  it,  but 
I  could  not  strike  it  out  now  without  opening  the  en- 
tire case.  The  motion  to  strike  it  out  will  be  denied, 
but  I  shall  charge  the  jury,  and  I  now  instruct  them, 
that  the  defendant  cannot  be  convicted  in  this  case 
for  what  he  then  said  to  the  witness  at  Tyrone.  In 
other  words,  that  statement,  according  to  the  undis- 
puted testimony,  was  previous  to  the  passage  of  the 
Espionage  Law,  and  therefore  he  cannot  be  con- 
victed for  making  those  statements.  The  jury  may 
consider  that  testimony  under  the  present  condi- 
tions of  the  record  for  the  purpose  of  determining 
what  the  defendant's  intent  was  at  the  time  he  made 
the  alleged  statement,  if  he  did  make  the  alleged 
statement,  as  set  forth  in  the  indictment,  and  what 
his  purpose  was  at  the  time  of  making  such  state- 
ments, if  he  did  make  them. 

Mr.  WORSLEY.— Exception. 

To  sustain  the  defendant's  contention  that  the 
testimony  introduced  at  the  trial  and  the  whole 
thereof  does  not  make  out  a  case  under  the  indict- 
ment or  any  of  the  counts  of  said  indictment,  and 
that  the  evidence  at  the  trial  was  insufficient  to 


United  States  of  America,  29 

(Testimony  of  August  Sandberg.) 

justify  the  verdict  of  the  jury,  the  defendant  herein 

sets  forth  in  substance  the  testimony  in  behalf  of  the 

defendant. 

Testimony  of  August  Sandberg,  in  His  Own  Behalf. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG,  a  witness  on  behalf  of  the 
defendant,  testified  substantially  as  follows: 

I  am  the  defendant  in  this  case;  I  live  at  Douglas, 
Arizona,  and  have  since  the  fall  of  1913,  and  am  a 
native  of  Sweden,  and  have  never  been  in  Germany; 
came  to  the  United  States  in  1896,  but  have  lived 
part  of  the  time  in  Mexico  and  about  one  and  a  half 
years  in  Canada.  My  business  has  been  chemistry 
and  metallurgy,  was  [22]  employed  by  Phelps- 
Dodge  Company  from  1890  to  1903,  then  by  an 
English  Company  in  Chihuahua,  Mexico.  Later  by 
the  Transvaal  Copper  Company  in  Mexico,  an 
American  Company  operating  in  Sonora.  Then 
went  to  Canada  in  exploration  for  one  and  a  half 
years.  Then  when  I  came  back  was  employed  by 
Phelps-Dodge  until  February  of  this  year.  Am  not 
a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  but  made  application 
in  December,  1912,  have  three  brothers  who  are  citi- 
zens of  this  country,  and  two  nephews  in  the  navy 
who  volunteered  last  year — my  brother's  sons.  I 
own  Liberty  Bonds  of  the  third  issue.  Was  in  the 
capacity  of  consulting  metallurgist  of  Phelps-Dodge, 
and  head  of  the  metallurgical  department,  am  a 
graduate  of  the  University  of  Sweden  in  chemistry, 
geology  and  mineralogy.  Have  never  been  accused 
of  wrong  before  nor  in  trouble  of  any  kind. 


30  August  Sandberg  vs, 

(Testimony  of  August  Sandberg.) 

I  did  not  say  to  William  Cramer  on  or  about  De- 
cember 15tli,  1917,  that  the  entry  of  the  United 
States  into  the  war  was  brought  about  by  Wall 
Street  interests  to  protect  our  foreign  loans  to  the 
Allies.  I  deny  that  I  said  to  Mr.  Cramer  upon  that 
or  any  other  occasion  that  Germany  is  not  as  much 
an  aristocracy  as  the  United  States,  because  the 
United  States  does  not  permit  criticism;  there  is  not 
as  much  danger  of  revolution  in  Germany  as  in  the 
allied  countries,  including  the  United  States.  I  did 
have  a  conversation  with  Mr.  Cramer  on  our  trip  to 
Bisbee,  and  I  think  the  discussion  was  about  the 
submarine  warfare.  I  made  a  statement  that  Ger- 
many did  not  start  the  submarine  warfare  until 
England  had  strewn  the  North  iSea  with  mines,  and 
I  simply  made  that  as  a  quotation  from  one  of  the 
United  States  Senators.  On  another  trip  we  made 
together  from  Nacozari  to  Douglas  on  February 
13th,  we  talked  about  Germany  being  a  democracy. 
Lloyd  George  had  made  a  speech  and  President 
Wilson  shortly  afterwards  issued  a  message  in  re- 
sponse to  the  Reichstag's  peace  proposal.  Mr. 
Cramer  had  a  newspaper  containing  this  speech  of 
President  Wilson's  and  he  gave  it  to  me  to  read,  and 
after  reading  the  speech  we  talked  about  it.  I  did 
designate  Germany  as  a  democracy,  that  is,  the  Im- 
perial German  state.  In  that  I  [23]  based  my 
assertion  upon  such  good  authority  as  Prof.  John  W. 
Purges.  I  have  his  books  and  have  read  them  more 
than  once.  They  contain  lots  of  information  on  the 
constitutional  laws  of  the  four  principal  countries  of 


United  States  of  America,  31 

(Testimony  of  August  Sandberg.) 
the  world.  I  never  asserted  to  Mr.  Cramer  or  to 
anybody  that  the  form  of  government  in  Germany  is 
more  than  the  United  States,  because  it  is  contrary 
to  my  better  knowledge.  I  had  reference  to  results 
and  not  the  form.  But  what  I  may  have  said  about 
the  government  of  Germany  being  more  democratic, 
which  I  am  not  denying,  I  undoubtedly  had  refer- 
ence to  results  and  not  the  form. 

Prof.  Surges  stated  in  a  book  published  in  1915, 
called  the  European  War,  as  far  as  the  equitable  dis- 
.tribution  of  wealth  and  intellect  is  concerned  that 
Germany  is  the  most  democratic  government  that 
the  world  has  produced.  The  two  legislative  bodies, 
the  Reichstag  and  the  Bundersrat,  make  the  laws  of 
Germany  and  the  Emperor  has  certain  great  powers 
on  certain  questions  of  the  army,  navy  and  taxation. 
They  have  twenty-five  separate  states  in  Germany, 
each  with  separate  constitution,  and  the  members  of 
the  Reichstag  are  elected  by  universal  suffrage.  I 
referred  Mr.  Cramer  to  that  work  of  Prof.  Burges  to 
substantiate  my  statement.  I  did  not  have  any  in- 
tention to  refer  to  the  military  operations  of  the 
United  States. 

I  did  not  say  that  President  Wilson  was  a  weak 
character,  in  talking  to  Mr.  Broughton.  I  told 
Broughton  that  Germany  was  more  democratic  than 
this  country,  and  simply  referred  to  the  results  of 
the  government  and  not  the  form  of  it.  I  deny  ever 
stating  to  anybody  that  the  German  form  of  govern- 
ment is  more  democratic  than  the  Government  of 
the  United  States.     I  know  different.     I  doubt  very 


32  August  Sandberg  vs. 

(Testimony  of  August  Sandberg.) 

much  that  I  used  the  attribute  ^^weak"  to  express 

my  opinion  of  the  President.    If  I  used  it  it  is  a 

very  bad  choice,  I  intended  to  say  ^inconsistent." 

I  regard  him  as  a  very  strong  and  forceful  man. 

[24] 

I  did  not  say  to  Robert  E.  Cameron  on  or  about 
the  13th  day  of  December,  1917,  or  to  any  body  that 
the  invasion  of  Belgium  by  Germany  was  all  right 
and  legitimate,  or  that  the  sinking  of  the  ^^Lusitania" 
was  justified  on  account  of  its  carrying  arms,  am- 
munition and  supplies.  I  discussed  these  proposi- 
tions with  him  and  simply  pointed  out  the  other  side 
of  the  question,  and  the  motive  and  causes  of  Ger- 
many for  these  acts.  But  I  never  justified  them, 
and  I  do  not  think  they  are  justified.  I  simply  tried 
to  show  that  other  people  have  other  points  of  view. 
That  does  not  mean  that  I  made  those  points  of  view 
my  own.  In  giving  utterances  to  those  statements 
I  absolutely  did  not  have  in  mind  any  harm  to  the 
United  States  of  America  or  any  interference  with 
its  operations  in  the  war. 

I  have  no  recollection  of  the  conversation  testified 
to  by  Mr.  Blickensderf  er  at  Tyrone  in  the  latter  part 
of  April,  1917,  with  reference  to  the  President  and 
his  clique.  I  may  have  compared  the  power  of  the 
President  of  the  United  States  and  that  of  the  Ger- 
man Emperor.  I  never  said  that  the  President  of 
the  United  States  could  declare  war.  I  know  better. 
I  have  been  at  work  all  of  the  time  I  have  been  in 
this  country.  I  never  have  at  any  time  done  or  said 
anything  with  the  intent  of  hindering  delaying  or 


United  States  of  America,  33 

(Testimony  of  August  Sandberg.) 
causing  mutiny  or  disturbance,  or  preventing  regis- 
tration, or  interfering  in  anywise  with  the  operation 
of  the  United  States  Government,  or  its  carying  on 
of  the  war.  My  sympathies  lie  with  this  country 
since  the  war  is  declared.  I  have  not  a  desire  that 
this  country  or  the  Allies  should  lose  the  war.  I  did 
not  say  it  would  be  a  blow  to  civilization  if  Germany 
should  lose  in  this  war,  but  that  it  would  be  a  blow 
to  civilization  if  Germany  was  crushed  and  made 
impotent.  This  opinion  and  statement  was  caused 
by  the  fact  that  I  believed  there  is  needed  in  [25]' 
Central  Europe  a  strong  power  to  prevent  the  Slav 
domination  of  Western  Europe.  My  own  country 
has  had  several  centuries  of  experience  with  that.  I 
believe  that  it  would  be  a  blow  to  civilization  if  Ger- 
many were  crushed.  I  may  have  said  to  Mr.  Graham 
that  France  would  become  a  second  or  third  rate 
power,  but  I  do  not  think  I  said  it  deserved  nothing 
better. 

I  did  state  at  the  preliminary  examination  that  I 
refused  to  answer  the  question  as  to  what  my  sym- 
pathies were  in  the  present  war.  I  took  the  stand 
of  a  Swedish  subject  at  that  time.  I  did  say  at  the 
preliminary  examination  that  I  had  not  argued  about 
the  war  with  anybody  since  the  country  had  gotten 
into  the  war.  But  I  told  Mr.  Daspit  that  it  was  a 
a  subject  no  man  could  avoid  talking  about.  I  took 
the  stand  against  England  before  the  United  States 
went  into  the  war  and  favorable  to  Germany. 

I  probably  did  refuse  at  the  time  Mr.  Daspit  ex- 
amined me  to  state  which  side  of  the  question  I  was 


34  August  Sandherg  vs. 

(Testimony  of  August  Sandberg.) 

on.     I  said  I  am  not  taking  sides.     I  take  a  more 

impartial  view  I  think  than  most  people. 

I  own  some  third  Liberty  Bonds;  I  bought  them 
after  this  trouble  came  up.  I  did  not  buy  any  before 
I  was  not  in  a  position  to  before,  because  the  means 
I  had  were  pledged  for  other  purposes  at  the  time. 
I  was  getting  a  reasonably  good  salary  in  excess  of 
five  thousand  dollars  a  year.     I  am  a  single  man. 

I  do  not  think  I  said  to  Mr.  Cramer  at  the  Gadsden 
Hotel  with  reference  to  the  Y.  M.  C.  A.,  Eed  Cross 
drives  and  prior  to  the  Third  Liverty  Loan,  ^^I  am 
not  afraid  to  turn  them  down. ' ' 

I  did  not  give  as  my  reason  that  the  sinking  of  the 
^'Lusitania"  was  justified  because  it  was  carrying 
arms  and  ammunition.  I  did  not  say  either  to  Mr. 
Cramer  or  to  Mr.  Cameron  that  the  ruthless  sub- 
marine warfare  was  right  or  justified  and  that  Ger- 
many was  within  her  rights.  I  explained  the  other 
side  of  the  question.  For  instance,  in  the  case  of 
the  ^^Lusitania,"  if  the  ships  were  carrying  contra- 
band of  war,  arms  or  ammunition.  I  understood 
that  [26]  the  Collector  of  the  Port  made  a  state- 
ment to  the  effect  that  they  had  arms  on  the  ^'Lusi- 
tania,"  but  I  did  not  give  it  as  a  reason  why  Germany 
should  sink  the  ^^Lusitania."  I  never  took  the  side 
of  the  United  States  in  any  of  those  issues. 

I  was  going  at  the  time  of  my  arrest  to  California 
and  from  there  to  New  York  and  from  there  to 
Sweden,  going  home  for  a  visit.  That  was  my  only 
reason.  I  did  not  say  I  had  a  position  with  Sweden, 
and  would  take  it  if  I  could  get  out  of  the  United 


United  States  of  America.  35 

(Testimony  of  August  Sandberg.) 
States  with  my  notes.     I  deny  that  I  had  a  position 
with  Sweden.     I  have  not  been  back  to  Sweden  since 
I  came  to  this  country. 

In  talking  to  Mr.  Graham  about  going  back  and 
forth  I  meant  back  and  forth  to  Mexico  and  Canada. 
I  lived  in  Mexico  perhaps  ten  years  in  the  states  of 
Sonora  and  Chihuahua.  And  that  was  the  reason 
I  had  not  become  a  naturalized  citizen. 

Testimony  of  Grant  H.  Dowell,  for  Defendant. 

GRANT  H.  DOWELL,  a  witness  on  behalf  of  the 
defendant,  testified  substantially  as  follows: 

I  live  at  Warren,  Arizona;  am  manager  of  the 
Phelps-Dodge  Corporation,  Copper  Queen  Branch; 
I  have  known  Dr.  Sandberg  about  eight  or  nine 
years,  more  intimately  during  the  last  two  or  three 
years  than  before.  I  do  not  recall  that  I  have  ever 
heard  anything  against  his  reputation.  I  do  not  be- 
lieve I  have  ever  heard  his  reputation  as  a  law-abid- 
ing citizen  discussed  prior  to  April,  1917. 

Testimony  of  C.  E.  La  Grande,  for  Defendant. 

C.  E.  LA  GRANDE,  a  witness  on  behalf  of  the 
defendant,  testified  substantially  as  follows  : 

I  have  lived  in  Douglas  fifteen  years.  Am  the 
mechanical  consulting  engineer  for  the  Phelps- 
Dodge  corporation.  Have  known  August  Sandberg 
about  twenty  years.  I  never  have  discussed  his  rep- 
utation with  anybody,  or  heard  it  discussed.  I  have 
never  heard  anybody  say  anything  wrong  about  him. 


36  August  Sandberg  vs. 

Testimony  of  J.  B.  Knowles,  for  Defendant. 

J.  B.  KNOWLES,  a  witness  on  behalf  of  defend- 
ant, testified  substantially  as  follows:     [27] 

I  live  in  Douglas,  and  have  known  August  Sand- 
berg about  five  years.  I  am  traveling  auditor  for 
Phelps-Dodge  corporation.  I  never  heard  the  de- 
fendant's general  reputation  for  being  a  law-abiding 
resident  in  the  community  in  which  he  lived  ques- 
tioned or  discussed. 

Testimony  of  William  B.  King,  for  Defendant. 

WILLIAM  B.  KING,  being  a  witness  on  behalf 
of  defendant,  testified  substantially  as  follows : 

I  have  lived  in  Douglas  three  years;  have  been  a 
lawyer  for  a  year  and  a  half,  and  knew  Prof.  Sand- 
berg since  1905.  I  knew  him  both  in  Mexico  and 
United  States.  I  never  heard  anything  against  his 
reputation  as  a  law-abiding  resident  where  he  lived. 

Testimony  of  G.  M.  Douglas,  for  Defendant. 

G.  M.  DOUGLAS,  a  witness  on  behalf  of  defend- 
ant, testified  substantially  as  follows : 

I  live  in  Cananea,  and  have  for  two  years.  Before 
that  in  Douglas.  Am  a  mechanical  engineer.  I 
have  known  Prof.  Sandberg  for  eighteen  years,  and 
know  his  general  reputation  as  to  being  a  law-abid- 
ing resident  in  the  community  in  which  he  has  lived. 
I  never  heard  anything  against  him. 

Testimony  of  C.  E.  Roark,  for  Defendant. 

C.  E.  BO  ARK,  a  witness  on  behalf  of  defendant, 
testified  as  follows,  substantially : 


United  States  of  America,  37 

(Testimony  of  C.  E.  Roark.) 

I  live  in  Douglas  and  have  for  four  years  and 
eight  months.  Am  a  mechanical  engineer  and  have 
known  Prof.  Sandberg  in  Douglas,  Arizona,  for  four 
years  and  eight  months.  I  know  his  general  repu- 
tation in  that  community  for  being  a  law-abiding 
resident.  It  is  good.  I  never  heard  anybody  talk 
of  his  reputation,  and  have  never  talked  with  any- 
body about  it.  I  never  heard  anybody  say  anything 
against  him. 

Testimony  of  W.  A.  Butchart,  for  Defendant. 

W.  A.  BUTCHART,  a  witness  on  behalf  of  defend- 
ant, testified  substantially  as  follows: 

I  live  in  Denver.  I  have  lived  there  five  or  six 
years  and  have  spent  a  great  deal  of  time  in  Ari- 
zona. I  have  known  [28J  Prof.  Sandberg  for 
five  years,  and  I  know  his  general  reputation  for 
being  a  law-abiding  resident  in  the  community 
where  he  lives.  It  is  good.  I  never  discussed  his 
reputation  with  anybody.  I  am  a  manufacturer  of 
machinery. 

Testimony  of  Jesse  C.  Daspit,  for  Plaintiff  (In 
Rebuttal). 

JESSE  C.  DASPIT,  a  witness  on  behalf  of  plain- 
tiff, in  rebuttal,  testified  substantially  as  follows: 

I  examined  the  effects  of  defendant,  with  his  per- 
mission, at  the  time  I  investigated  him.  He  was 
present  during  the  entire  time.  He  had  three  or 
four  boxes  of  books  of  various  kinds,  including  a 
number  representing  the  German  side  of  the  war. 
A  number  of  pamphlets,    some   blue-prints  of  the 


38  August  Sandherg  vs, 

(Testimony  of  Jesse  C.  Daspit.) 
Copper  Queen  Smelter,  or  parts  of  the  smelter, 
some  note  or  data  relating  to  mining  proper- 
ties, and  sketches  or  maps  of  mining  proper- 
ties. He  also  had  three  trunks,  two  of  which 
contained  his  personal  effects  and  clothing,  and 
some  private  papers,  and  one  of  the  trunks  was 
packed  with  these  books  and  pamphlets  and  maps 
which  I  have  referred  to.  A  great  many  of  them 
were  written  in  German,  some  in  French  and  some 
in  English.  The  pamphlets  were  for  the  most  part 
in  German.  I  could  not  read  them,  but  had  two 
soldiers  up  there  trying  to  read  them.  He  had  a 
speech  of  President  Wilson,  one  of  Secretary  Mc- 
Adoo,  and  one  by  Senator  La  FoUette.  I  saw  some 
of  his  notes  in  English.  We  consumed  the  entire 
day.  I  had  him  accompany  me  to  the  office  about 
nine  o'clock  in  the  morning,  and  took  a  statement 
from  him  with  a  stenographer,  and  then  had  his 
effects,  with  the  exception  of  those  in  his  room, 
moved  to  the  office,  and  they  were  examined  off  and 
on  during  the  entire  day  up  until  about  six  or  seven 
o'clock  in  the  evening,  and  later  we  went  to  his 
room,  and  examined  his  two  trunks  and  suitcase  and 
handbag.  Mr.  Sandberg  was  not  under  arrest  at 
that  time.  He  was  in  custody.  No  complaint  had 
been  filed  against  him.  The  things  were  all  re- 
packed and  sent  by  me  to  the  place  from  which  I 
took  them,  at  the  Government's  [29]  expense.  I 
asked  him  if  he  would  permit  us  to  examine  the 
stuff  he  had  packed  in  these  boxes  and  in  his  trunks, 
and  he  evaded  the   question.    He  wished  to  know 


United  States  of  America,  39 

(Testimony  of  Jesse  C.  Daspit.) 
what  authority  I  had  to  do  that  and  why  I  wanted 
to  see  them.  He  wished  to  know  my  authority,  and 
I  told  him  I  had  to  take  a  statement  from  him  and 
examine  his  effects.  I  told  him  I  was  a  representa- 
tive of  the  government,  and  he  was  a  foreigner  pre- 
paring to  leave  the  country.  He  still  was  not  very 
willing,  and  said  it  was  a  hardship.  Upon  referring 
to  my  record,  to  refresh  my  recollection,  he  stated, 
*^No,  I  do  not  object,  but  it  seems  to  me  that  these 
effects  will  have  to  be  examined  again  in  the  east, 
and  I  do  not  see  why  this  should  be  done  here."  The 
maps  and  data  pertaining  to  his  profession.  I  re- 
member distinctly  one  map  of  some  mining  proposi- 
tion in  Canada,  and  I  have  in  mind  now  distinctly 
blue-prints  of  the  Copper  Queen  Smelter  at  Douglas, 
which,  of  course,  pertained  to  his  business.  I  did 
not  read  all  the  notes  he  had.  I  did  not  do  all  the 
investigating.  Mr.  Tompkins  assisted  me,  and  Mr. 
Eausmann,  who  reads  German,  looked  at  some  of 
the  pamphlets,  and  there  were  two  soldiers  there 
who  read  some  German,  too. 

Testimony  of  Robert  E.  Cameron,  for  Plaintiff  (In 

Rebuttal). 

ROBERT  E.  CAMERON,  a  witness  on  behalf  of 
plaintiff,  in  rebuttal,  testified  substantially  as  fol- 
lows: 

On  one  of  the  trips  between  Douglas  and  Bisbee 
some  time  during  the  Month  of  December,  Mr.  Sand- 
berg  made  this  statement:  *^I  have  a  position  with 
Sweden,  and  I  will  take  it  if  I  can  get  out  of  the 


40  August  Scmdberg  vs, 

(Testimony  of  Robert  E.  Cameron.) 

country  with  my  stuff. ' '    I  asked  him  what  he  meant 

by  stuff,  and  he  said  his  notes. 

Testimony  of  John  W.  Murray,  for  Plaintiif  (In 
Rebuttal). 

JOHN  W.  MURRAY,  a  witness  on  behalf  of 
plaintiff,  called  in  rebuttal,  testified  substantially  as 
follows  : 

August  Sandberg  did  state  to  me,  on  or  about  Sep- 
tember 15th,  shortly  after  the  first  contingent  left, 
that  Germany  is  the  most  democratic  government  in 
the  world.     [30] 

Testimony  of  Edward  M.  Graham,  for  Plaintiff  (In 

Rebuttal). 

EDWARD  M.  GRAHAM,  a  witness  on  behalf  of 
plaintiff,  called  in  rebuttal,  testified  substantially  as 
follows : 

Mr.  Sandberg,  in  the  Gadsden  Hotel,  on  the  22d 
day  of  July,  1917,  when  I  asked  him  as  to  whether 
or  not  he  was  a  naturalized  citizen,  said:  That  he 
was  not ;  that  he  went  back  and  forth  a  good  many 
times,  and  therefore  had  not  become  naturalized. 

Testimony  of  William  Cramer^  for  Plaintiff   (In 

Rebuttal). 

WILLIAM  CRAMER,  a  witness  on  behalf  of 
plaintiff,  called  in  rebuttal,  testified  substantially  as 
follows : 

On  the  date  they  had  a  Knights  of  Columbus 
drive,  I  was  coming  out  of  the  lobby  of  the  Gadsden 
Hotel,  with  Mr.  Sandberg,   and  he  said  to  me;  ''I 


United  States  of  America,  41 

am  not  afraid  to  turn  them  down  when  they  come 
to  me." 

And  now  Avithin  the  time  aforesaid,  so  allowed 
therefor,  the  defendant  does  now  present  this,  his 
bill  of  exceptions,  and  asks  that  the  same  may  be  ex- 
amined, approved  and  allowed  by  the  Court,  and 
filed  and  made  and  deemed  to  be  and  held  a  part  of 
the  record  in  this  cause,  and  on  the  6th  day  of  July, 
1918,  in  the  presence  of  the  parties  in  open  court, 
the  foregoing  bill  of  exceptions  was  settled  and  ap- 
proved by  the  Court  and  having  been  engrossed  now 
is  signed  and  directed  to  be  filed,  and  made  a  part  of 
the  record  of  said  cause. 

Done  in  open  court  this  6th  day  of  July,  1918. 

WM.  H.  SAWTELLE, 
Judge  United  States  District  Court  for  the  District 
of  Arizona.     [31] 


In  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  District 

of  Arizona. 

No.  C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Acknowledgment  of  Service  of  Draft  of  Proposed 
Bill  of  Exceptions. 
The  United  States  District   Attorney  hereby  ac- 


42  August  Sandherg  vs, 

knowledges  service  upon  him  this  day  of  a  draft  of  a 
proposed  bill   of  exceptions   in   the   above-entitled 
cause. 
Dated  Tucson,  this  2d  day  of  July,  1918. 

C.  E.  McFALL, 
Asst.   U.  S.   District   Attorney  for  the  District  of 
Arizona. 

[Endorsements]  :  In  the  United  States  District 
Court  for  the  District  of  Arizona.  United  States 
of  America  vs.  August  Sandberg,  Defendant. 
C-704 — Tucson.  Bill  of  Exceptions.  A.  A.  Wors- 
ley,  Tucson,  Arizona,  Attorney  for  Defendant.  Filed 
July  6th,  1918.     Mose  Drachman,  Clerk.     [32'j 


In  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the 
District  of  Arizona. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Petition  for  Writ  of  Error. 

Now  comes  August  Sandberg,  defendant  in  the 
above-entitled  cause,  and  says  that  on  the  first  day 
of  June,  1918,  this  Court  rendered  judgment  and  sen- 
tence against  this  defendant,  and  sentenced  the  de- 
fendant to  serve  a  term  of  two  years  at  the  Federal 
Prison  at  Leavenworth,  Kansas,  and  to  pay  a  fine 
of  Five  Hundred  Dollars,  in  which  judgment  and 
sentence  and  the  proceedings   had  prior  thereto  in 


United  States  of  America,  43 

this  cause,  certain  errors  were  committed  to  the 
prejudice  of  this  defendant ;  all  of  which  will  more 
in  detail  appear  from  the  assignment  of  errors  which 
is  filed  with  this  petition. 

WHEREFORE,  this  defendant  prays  that  a  writ 
of  error  may  issue  in  this  behalf  out  of  the  United 
States  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Ninth  Cir- 
cuit for  the  correction  of  errors  so  complained  of, 
and  that  a  transcript  of  the  records,  proceedings  and 
the  papers  of  this  cause,  duly  authenticated,  may  be 
sent  to  said  Court  of  Appeals. 

Defendant  further  prays  that  an  order  may  be  en- 
tered herein  admitting  the  defendant  to  bail,  pend- 
ing the  determination  of  said  writ  of  error  in  the 
United  States  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  for  the 
Ninth  Circuit. 

A.  A.  WORSLEY, 
Attorney  for  the  Defendant. 

[Endorsements] :  In  the  District  Court  of  the 
United  States  for  the  District  of  Arizona.  United 
States  of  America  vs.  August  Sandberg,  Defendant. 
Petition  for  Writ  of  Error.  C-704— Tucson.  A,  A. 
Worsley,  Tucson,  Arizona,  Attorney  for  Defendant. 
Filed  July  6th,  1918.     Mose  Drachman,  Clerk.     [33] 


1%  the  United  States  District  Court  in  ayid  for  the 
District  of  Arizona. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 


44  August  Sandberg  vs. 

Assignment  of  Errors. 

Defendant,  August  Sandberg,  for  his  assignment 
of  errors  herein,  alleges  as  follows : 

1.  That  the  Court  erred  in  not  sustaining  the  de- 
murrer to  the  indictment  and  to  each  count  thereof, 
on  the  grounds  that  the  allegations  as  set  forth  in  the 
indictment,  and  in  each  count  thereof  are  insufficient, 
and  do  not  state  a  public  offense,  there  being  no 
allegation  in  the  indictment  that  the  statements  al- 
leged therein  to  have  been  made  by  the  defend- 
ant were  made  in  the  presence  of  any  of  draft  age 
or  in  the  presence  of  anyone  connected  with 
the  military  department  of  the  United  States,  and 
that  it  appears  on  the  face  of  the  indictment  and 
each  count  thereof,  that  the  statements  therein  set 
forth  were  merely  an  expression  of  opinion  by  the 
defendant  and  not  intended  to  violate  any  law  or  to 
case  mutiny,  disloyalty  or  any  interference  with  the 
Military  Forces  of  the  United  States,  and  that  the 
statements  set  forth  in  the  indictment,  and  in  each 
count  thereof,  were  a  proper  exercise  of  the  freedom 
of  speech  as  guaranteed  by  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States. 

2.  That  the  Court  erred  in  not  granting  defend- 
ant's motion  for  an  instructed  verdict  of  acquittal 
at  the  close  of  the  testimony  of  the  Government  at 
the  trial  on  the  grounds  that  it  did  not  appear  from 
the  evidence,  that  there  was  any  intent  on  the  part 
of  the  defendant  to  hinder,  delay,  corrupt  or  in  any 
wise  interfere  with  the  Military  Forces  of  the  United 
States,  and  that  there  was  no    evidence  tending  to 


United  States  of  America,  45 

show  or  prove  that  the  statements  in  [34]  said 
indictment  alleged  to  have  been  made  by  the  de- 
fendant were  either  true  or  false. 

Further  that  there  was  no  evidence  tending  to 
prove  that  the  defendant  attempted  to  circulate  said 
statements  for  any  malicious  or  criminal  purpose 
whatever,  and  that  the  evidence  fails  to  show  any 
overt  act  or  any  conduct  on  the  part  of  the  defend- 
ant from  which  an  intent  or  purpose  might  be  drawn 
other  than  a  legitimate  purpose. 

Further,  that  none  of  the  evidence  introduced  by 
the  Government  in  the  case  tended  to  show  that  the 
statements  alleged  to  have  been  made  by  the  defend- 
ant injured  or  in  anywise  operated  to  the  detriment 
of  the  operations  of  the  Military  Forces  of  the 
United  States. 

3.  That  the  Court  erred  at  the  trial  of  said  case 
in  denying  defendant's  motion  to  strike  from  the 
record  and  from  the  consideration  of  the  jury,  for 
any  purpose,  the  testimony  of  F.  C.  Blickensderfer 
on  the  grounds  that  it  clearly  appeared  from  the 
testimony  that  said  statements  as  testified  to  by  said 
Blickensderfer  were  made  during  the  month  of 
April,  1917,  and  before  the  passage  of  the  Espionage 
Act,  under  which  the  defendant  is  charged.  Further 
that  it  appears  from  the  evidence  that  at  the  time 
the  defendant  made  said  statements  if  at  all,  it  was 
during  a  legitimate  discussion  and  did  not  constitute 
an  offense  of  any  kind. 

4.  Further,  that  the  testimony  introduced  at  the 
trial,  and  the  whole  thereof  does  not  make  out  a  case 
imder  the  indictment,  or  any  of  the  counts  of  said 


46  August  Scmdierg  vs, 

indictment,  and  the  evidence  at  the  trial  was  insuffi- 
cient to  justify  the  verdict  of  the  jury. 

WHBREFOEE,  the  defendant  says  that  for  said 
manifest  errors,  the  judgment  and  sentence  of  the 
Court  should     [35]     be  reversed. 

A.  A.  WORSLEY, 
Attorney  for  Defendant. 

[Endorsements] :  In  the  United  States  District 
Court  in  and  for  the  District  of  Arizona.  United 
States  of  America  vs.  August  Sandberg,  Defendant. 
Assignment  of  Errors.  C-704 — Tucson.  A.  A. 
Worsley,  Tucson,  Arizona,  Attorney  for  Defendant. 
Piled  July  6th,  1918.      Mose  Drachman,  Clerk. 


In  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the 
District  of  Arizona, 

UNITED  STATES  OP  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Order  Allowing  Writ  of  Error. 

And  now  comes  the  defendant  by  his  attorney,  and 
filed  herein  and  presented  to  the  Court  his  petition, 
praying  for  the  allowance  of  a  writ  of  error,  and 
assignment  of  errors  intended  to  be  urged  by  him, 
praying  also  that  a  transcript  of  the  record  and  pro- 
ceedings and  papers  from  which  the  judgment  was 
entered,  duly  authenticated,  may  be  sent  to  the 
United  States  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  for  the 
Ninth  Judicial    Circuit,  and    that    such  other  and 


United  States  of  America,  47 

further  proceedings  may  be  had  as  may  be  proper 
in  the  premises; 

On  consideration  thereof,  the  Court  does  allow  the 
writ  of  error  and  admits  the  defendant  to  bail,  pend- 
ing the  determination  of  said  writ  of  error  in  the 
said  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals,  upon  his  giving  bond 
with  two  or  more  good  and  sufficient  sureties  thereon, 
in  the  sum  of  Fifteen  Thousand  Dollars  ($15,000), 
to  be  approved  by  the  Clerk  of  the  United  States 
District  Court  at  Tucson,  Arizona. 

Dated  July  6th,  1918. 

WM.  H.  SAWTELLE, 

Judge.     [36] 

[Endorsements] :  In  the  District  Court  of  the 
United  States  for  the  District  of  Arizona.  United 
States  of  America  vs.  August  Sandberg,  Defendant. 
Order  Allowing  Writ  of  Error.  C-704 — Tucson. 
A,  A.  Worsley,  Tucson,  Arizona,  Attorney  for  De- 
fendant. Filed  July  6th,  1918.  Mose  Drachman, 
Clerk. 


In  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the 
District  of  Arizona. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Bail  Bond. 
KNOW  ALL  MEN  BY  THESE  PRESENTS: 
That  we,  August  Sandberg,  as  principal,  and  Charles 


48  August  Sandherg  vs, 

E.  Walker  and  J.  C.  Etcliells,  as  sureties,  are 
held  and  firmly  bound  unto  the  United  States 
of  America  in  the  full  and  just  sum  of  fifteen  thou- 
sand dollars,  to  be  paid  the  said  United  States  of 
America,  payment  well  and  truly  to  be  made,  we  bind 
ourselves,  our  executors  and  administrators  jointly 
and  severally  by  these  presents. 

Sealed  with  our  seals  and  dated  this  6th  day  of 
July,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord,  1918. 

WHEREAS,  lately,  at  the  May  term.  A,  D.  1918, 
of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the 
District  of  Arizona,  in  a  suit  pending  in  said  court 
between  the  United  States  of  America,  plaintiff,  and 
August  Sandberg,  defendant,  a  judgment  and  sen- 
tence was  rendered  against  the  said  August  Sand- 
berg, and  the  said  August  Sandberg  has  obtained  a 
writ  of  error  from  the  United  States  Circuit  Court 
of  Appeals  for  the  9th  Circuit,  to  reverse  the  judg- 
ment and  sentence  in  the  aforesaid  suit,  and  a  cita- 
tion directed  to  the  said  United  States  of  America, 
citing  and  admonishing  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica to  be  and  appear  in  the  United  States  Circuit 
Court  of  Appeals  for  the  9th  Circuit  at  the  city  of 
San  Francisco,  California,  thirty  days  from  and 
after  the  date  of  said  citation,  which  citation  has 
been  duly  served.     [37] 

Now,  the  condition  of  the  above  obligation  is  such 
that  if  the  said  August  Sandberg  shall  appear  in  the 
United  States  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  9th 
Circuit  on  the  first  day  of  the  next  term  thereof,  to 
be  held  at  the  City  of  San  Francisco,  on  the  first 
Monday  in  October,  A.  D.  1918,  and  from  day  to  day 


United  States  of  America,  49 

thereafter  during  said  term,  and  from  term  to  term 
and  from  time  to  time  until  finally  discharged  there- 
from, and  shall  abide  and  obey  all  orders  made  by 
the  said  United  States  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  for 
the  9th  Circuit  in  said  cause,  and  shall  surrender 
himself  in  execution  of  the  judgment  and  sentence 
appealed  from  as  said  Court  may  direct,  if  the  judg- 
ment and  sentence  of  the  said  District  Court  against 
him  shall  be  affirmed  by  the  said  United  States  Cir- 
cuit Court  of  Appeals  for  the  9th  Circuit,  then  the 
above  obligation  to  be  void,  else  to  remain  in  full 
force,  virtue  and  effect. 

AUGUST  SANDBERC.  (Seal) 
CHAS.  E.  WALKER.  (Seal) 
J.  C.  ETCHELLS.  (Seal) 

United  States  of  America, 
District  of  Arizona, — ss. 

Charles  E.  Walker  and  J.  C.  Etchells,  whose  names 
are  subscribed  as  sureties  to  the  within  bond,  being 
severally  sworn,  each  for  himself,  deposes  and  says : 
That  he  is  a  resident  and  householder  within  the 
District  of  Arizona;  that  he  is  worth  the  amount 
for  which  he  becomes  surety  on  said  bond  over  and 
above  all  debts  and  liabilities  in  unencumbered  prop- 
erty situated  within  this  district,  exclusive  of  prop- 
erty exempt  from  execution  and  forced  sale. 

CHAS.  E.  WALKER. 

J.  C.  ETCHELLS. 

Subscribed  and  sworn  to  before  me  this  6th  day 
of  July,  1918. 

[Notarial  Seal]  J.  W.  LEECH. 

My  commission  expires  July  9, 1921.     [38] 


50  August  Sandberg  vs, 

I  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing  is  a  good  and 
sufficient  bond. 

A.  A.  WORSLEY, 
Attorney  for  Defendant. 
Approved : 

MOSE  DRACHMAlSr, 
Clerk  of  U.  S.  District  Court. 

Approved  as  to  form :  July  6th,  1918. 

THOMAS  A.  FLYNN, 

U.  S.  Attorney. 

[Endorsements] :  In  the  District  Court  of  the 
United  States  for  the  District  of  Arizona.  United 
States  of  America  vs.  August  Sandberg,  Defendant. 
Bail  Bond.  C-704— Tucson.  A.  A.  Worsley,  Tuc- 
son, Arizona,  Attorney  for  Defendant.  Filed  July 
6th,  1918.     Mose  Drachman,  Clerk. 


UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA. 

District  Court   of  the   United  States,  District   of 

Arizona. 

Clerk's  Office. 

No.  C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

vs. 
AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Praecipe  for  Transcript  of  Record. 

To  the  Clerk  of  said  Court : 

Sir:  You  will  please  prepare  a  transcript  of  the 


United  States  of  America,  51 

complete  record  in  the   above-entitled   cause  to   be 
filed  in  the  office  of  the  clerk  of  the  United  States 
Circuit  Court  of  Appeals   for   the   Ninth   Judicial 
Circuit,  under  the  writ  of  error  to  be  perfected  to 
said  court  in  said  cause,  and  include  in  said  transcript 
the   following   proceedings,  pleadings,    papers,  rec- 
ords and  files,  to  wit: 
Indictment. 
Demurrer. 
Plea.     [39] 

Transcript  of  minute  entries. 
Verdict  of  jury  and  sentence  of  Court. 
Order  allowing  bill  of  exceptions. 
Bill  of  exceptions. 

Acknowledgment  of  service  of  bill  of  exceptions. 
Petition  for  writ  of  error. 
Order  allowing  writ  of  error. 
Bond. 

Writ  of  error. 
Citation. 

Praecipe  for  transcript ; 

— and  all  other  record  entries,  pleadings,  proceed- 
ings, papers  and  filing  necessary  or  proper  to  make  a 
complete  record  upon  said  writ  of  error  in  said  cause, 
said  transcript  to  be  prepared  as  required  by  law, 
and  the  rules  of  this  Court  and  the  rules  of  the 
United  States  Circuit  Court  of  Apeals  for  the  9th 
Judicial  Circuit. 

A.  A.  WORSLEY, 
Attorney  for  Defendant. 

[Endorsements]  :    In  the  District  Court  of  the 
United  States,  District  of  Arizona.     United  States 


52  August  Sandberg  vs. 

of  America  vs.  August  Sandberg,  Defendant.  Prae- 
cipe for  Transcript  of  Record.  C-704— Tucson. 
A.  A.  Worsley,  Tucson,  Arizona,  Attorney  for  De- 
fendant. Filed  July  6tli,  1918.  Mose  Drachman, 
Clerk. 


In  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  District 

of  Arizona, 

C-704— Tucson. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 

vs. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Certificate  of  Clerk  U.  S.  District  Court  to  Transcript 

of  Record. 

United  States  of  America, 
District  of  Arizona, — ss. 

I,  Mose  Drachman,  Clerk  of  the  United  States 
District  Court  for  the  District  of  Arizona,  do  hereby 
certify  that  the  above  and  foregoing  pages  numbered 
one  to  thirty-nine  inclusive  constitute  and  are  a  true, 
complete  and  correct  copy  of  the  record,  pleadings 
and  proceedings  had  in  the  case  of  United  States  of 
America  vs.  August  Sandberg,  Defendant,  No.  C-704 
— Tucson,  as  the  same  is  called  for  in  the  praecipe, 
a  copy  of  which  is  made  a  part  of  this  transcript,  as 
the  same  remain  on  file  [40]  and  record  in  the 
said  District  Court,  and  I  also  annex  and  transmit 
herewith  the  original  Citation  and  Writ  of  Error  in 
said  action. 


United  States  of  America,  53 

I  further  certify  that  the  cost  of  preparing  and 
certifying  to  said  record  amounts  to  the  sum  of 
twenty-two  and  fifty  hundredths  dollars  ($22.50), 
and  that  the  same  has  been  paid  in  full  by  the  appel- 
lant herein,  August  Sandberg. 

IN  TESTIMONY  WHEREOF,  I  have  hereunto 
set  my  hand  and  afi&xed  the  seal  of  the  United  States 
District  Court  for  the  District  of  Arizona,  at  Tucson, 
in  said  District,  this  twenty-fifth  day  of  July,  in  the 
year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and 
eighteen,  and  of  the  Independence  of  the  United 
States  of  America  the  one  hundred  and  forty-third. 

[Seal]  MOSE  DRACHMAN, 

Clerk  United  States  District  Court,  District  of  Ari- 
zona. 

By  Effie  D.  Botts, 
Chief  Deputy  Clerk.     [41] 


In  the  United  States  District  Court,  for  the  District 

of  Arizona, 

C-70^^TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA, 

YS. 

AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Writ  of  Error. 

The  President  of  the  United  States  of  America,  to 
the  Honorable  Judge  of  the  District  Court  of 
the  United  States,  for  the  District  of  Arizona, 
GREETING: 


54  August  Sandberg  vs, 

BECAUSE,  in  the  record  and  proceedings,  as  also 
in  the  rendition  of  the  judgment  of  a  plea  which  is 
in  the  said  District  Court,  before  you,  between  Au- 
gust Sandberg,  plaintiff  in  error,  and  United  States 
of  America,  defendant  in  error,  a  manifest  error 
hath  happened,  to  the  great  damage  of  the  said  Au- 
gust Sandberg,  plaintiff  in  error,  as  by  his  complaint 
appears : 

We  being  willing  that  error,  if  any  hath  been, 
should  be  duly  corrected  and  full  and  speedy  justice 
done  to  the  parties  aforesaid  in  this  behalf,  do  com- 
mand you,  if  judgment  be  therein  given,  that  then 
under  your  seal,  distinctly  and  openly,  you  send  the 
record  and  proceedings  aforesaid,  with  all  things 
concerning  the  same,  to  the  United  States  Circuit 
Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Ninth  Circuit,  together 
with  this  writ,  so  that  you  have  the  same  at  the  city 
of  San  Francisco,  in  the  State  of  California,  within 
thirty  days  from  the  date  hereof,  in  the  said  Circuit 
Court  of  Appeals,  to  be  then  and  there  held,  th^t, 
the  record  and  proceedings  aforesaid  being  [42] 
inspected,  the  said  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  may 
cause  further  to  be  done  therein  to  correct  that  error, 
what  of  right,  and  according  to  the  laws  and  cus- 
toms of  the  United  States,  should  be  done. 

WITNESS  the  Honorable  EDWARD  D. 
WHITE,  Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States,  the 
6th  day  of  July,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand 
nine  hundred  and  eighteen. 

[Seal]  MOSE  DRACHMAN, 

Clerk  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for   the 
District  of  Arizona. 


United  States  of  America.  55 

Allowed  by 


[43] 

[Endorsed]  :  In  the  United  States  District  Court 
for  the  District  of  Arizona.  0-704 — Tucson.  Au- 
gust Sandberg,  Plaintiff  in  Error,  vs.  United  States 
of  America,  Defendant  in  Error.  Writ  of  Error. 
Eiled  July  6th,  1918.  Mose  Drachman,  Clerk. 
[44J 


In  the  United  Stages  District  Court  for  the  District 

of  Arizona. 

C-704— TUCSON. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 
vs. 
AUGUST  SANDBERG, 

Defendant. 

Citation  on  Writ  of  Error. 

The  President  of  the  United  States:  To  the  Judge 
of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States,  for 
the  District  of  Arizona,  GREETING. 
You  are  hereby  cited   and  admonished  to  be  and 
appear  at  a  United  States  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals 
for  the  Ninth  Circuit,  to  be  holden   at  the  City  of 
San  Francisco,  in  the   State  of   California,  within 
thirty  days  from  the  date  hereof,  pursuant  to  a  writ 
of  error  duly  issued  and  now  on  file  in  the  clerk's 
office  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Dis- 
trict of  Arizona,  wherein  August  Sandberg  is  plain- 


56  August  Sandberg  vs, 

tiff  in  error,  and  you  are  defendant  in  error,  to  show 
cause,  if  any  there  be,  why  the  judgment  rendered 
against  the  said  plaintiff  in  error,  as  in  the  said  writ 
of  error  mentioned,  should  not  be  corrected,  and  why 
speedy  justice  should  not  be  done  to  the  parties  in 
that  behalf. 

WITNESS,  the  Honorable  EDWAED  D. 
WHITE,  Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court,  this 
6th  day  of  July,  A.  D.  1918. 

WM.  H.  SAWTELLE, 
United   States  District   Judge  for  the   District  of 
Arizona.     [45] 

United  States  of  America, — ss. 

On  this day  of  July,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord 

one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  eighteen,  personally 

appeared  before  me ,  the  subscriber, ,  and 

makes  oath  that  he  delivered  a  true  copy  of  the 
within  citation  to  Thomas  A.  Elynn,  United  States 
District  Attorney  for  the  District  of  Arizona. 


Subscribed  and  sworn  to  before  me  at ,  this 

—  day  of  July,  A.  D.  1918. 


Service  accepted  this  6th  day  of  July,  1918. 

THOMAS  A.  ELYNN, 
United  States  Attorney.     [46] 

[Endorsed]  :  In  the  District  Court  of  the  United 
States,  District  of  Arizona.  No.  C-704— Tucson. 
United  States  of  America  vs.  August  Sandberg,  De- 
fendant. Citation.  Filed  July  6th,  1918.  Mose 
Drachman,  Clerk.     [47] 


United  States  of  America,  57 

[Endorsed]:  No.  3187.  United  States  Circuit 
Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Ninth  Circuit.  August 
Sandberg,  Plaintiff  in  Error,  vs.  United  States  of 
America,  Defendant  in  Error.  Transcript  of  Rec- 
ord. Upon  Writ  of  Error  to  the  United  States 
District  Court  of  the  District  of  Arizona, 
Filed  July  29,  1918. 

P.  D.  MONCKTON, 
Clerk  of  the  United  States  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals 
for  the  Ninth  Circuit. 

By  Paul  P.  O'Brien, 

Deputy  Clerk. 


GAYLAMOUNT 
PAMPHLET  BINDER 

Manufadurtd  by 

6AYLORD  BROS.  Inc. 

Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

Stockton,  Calif. 


m 


